The Separation between State and Religion

In time we will realize that Democracy is the entitlement of individuals to every right that was in its times alloted to kings. The right to speak and decide, to be treated with decency, to serve and be served by people in a State of “love” that is, to serve with one’s work for the development of ‘life’. To belong to the Kingdom of Human Beings without racial, national, social or academic separations. To love and be loved. To die at the service of the whole and be honored in one’s death, for one’s life and work was legitimately valued. To be graceful and grateful. To have the pride and the humility of being One with the Universe, One with every realm of Existence, One with every living and deceased soul. To treat with dignity and be treated with dignity for One is dignified together with All others and Life itself. To walk the path of compassion, not in the sorrow of guilt but in the pride of being. To take responsability for one’s mistakes and sufferings and stand up again and again like a hero and a heroine and face the struggle that is put at one’s feet and in one’s hands. Millions of people, millions and millions of people might take many generations to realize the consciousness of our humaneness but there is no other dignified path for the human being.

The “work” as I conceive it is psychological and political. Psychology is the connection between the different dimensions within one’s self and Politics is the actualization of that consciousness in our practical lives. Religion is the ceremony that binds the connectedness between the individual and the Universe. The separation between religion, politics and science, the arts and sports is, in the sphere of the social, the reflection of the schizophrenia within the individual and the masses. The dialogue between individuality and the "human" belongs to consciousness. The tendency to develop cults resides in the shortcomings we’are finding in life as it is structured today. “Life” has become the private property of a few priviledged who cannot profit from it because as soon as it is appropriated it stops to be “life” or “life-giving”.

We are all the victims of our own invention and each one is called upon to find solutions. The only problem is believing our selves incapable of finding them. We are now free to use all Systems of knowledge objectively, sharing them without imposing our will on each other. To become objective about our lives means to understand that the institutions that govern its experience are critically important. That we are one with the governments, one with the religious activities that mark its pace, that the arena’s in which we move our bodies and the laboratories in which we explore our possibilities are ALL part and parcel of our own personal responsibility. That WE ARE ONE WITH EACH OTHER AND EVERYTHING AROUND US and acknowledge for ourselves a bond of love in conscious responsibility. That we human beings know ourselves part of each other and are willing and able to act on our behalf for the benefit of each and every individual. That we no longer allow governments, industries, universities or any other institution to run along unchecked by the objective principles of humaneness. That we do not allow gurus to abuse their power or governors to steal the taxes and use them to their personal advantage in detriment of the whole. That we do not allow abuse from anyone anywhere because life is too beautiful to do so and that we are willing to stop the rampant crime with the necessary compassion Conscious knowledge is every individual's right. Conscious action is every individual's duty.

Blog Archive

Wednesday 20 October 2010

Sapere aude


Sapere aude

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sapere aude is a Latin phrase meaning "dare to discern". Originally used by Horace, it is a common motto for universities and other institutions, after becoming closely associated withThe Enlightenment by Immanuel Kant in his seminal essay, What is Enlightenment?. Kant claimed it was the motto for the entire period, and used it to explore his theories of reason in the public sphere. Later, Michel Foucault took up Kant's formulation in an attempt for a place for the individual in his post-structuralistphilosophy and come to terms with the problematic legacy of the Enlightenment.

Contents

 [hide]

[edit]Horace's use

The original use seems to be in Horace's first book of Epistlesdimidium facti qui coepit habet: sapere aude, incipe ("He who has begun is half done: dare to know!").[1] It can also be translated as "Dare to be wise". The phrase forms the moral to a story where a fool (naive person) waits for the stream to stop before crossing it. "He who begins is half done. Dare to be wise. Make a beginning." is a loose translation. Horace's words suggest the value of human endeavour, of persistence in reaching a goal and of the need for effort in overcoming obstacles.

[edit]Kant's use

Kant's essay describes the Enlightenment as "man's release from his self-incurred tutelage". "Sapere Aude" is his charge to readers to follow this program of intellectual self-liberation, the tool of which is Reason. The essay is a shrewd political challenge, suggesting that the mass of "domestic cattle" have been bred by unfaithful stewards not to question what they've been told. Kant classifies the uses of reason as public and private. Public use is use in discourse in the public sphere, such as in political argument or analysis; private use is such use of reasoned argument that a person entrusted with official or organizational duties might reasonably make in that capacity. Skillfully praising Frederick II of Prussia for his receptiveness to Enlightenment ideas, Kant imagines his enlightened prince instructing subjects, "Argue as much as you will, and about what you will, only obey!" It is the courage of individuals to follow Sapere Aude that will break the shackles of despotism, and reveal through public discourse, for the benefit both of the population and the state, better methods of governance, or legitimate complaints.[2]

[edit]Foucault's use

Foucault, in his response to Kant, also entitled "What is Enlightenment?", rejects much of the hopeful political content of a people ruled bySapere Aude. Instead, Foucault looks at the critical tools of using ones own reason, and how disputing Kant's other arguments only serves to reinforce the value of Sapere Aude (Foucault uses the term critical ontology as a synonym for his concept) with a sort of faithful betrayal.
Foucault too, however, roots his vision of Sapere Aude in a definite practice. Instead of a mere theory or doctrine, it becomes an individual "attitude, an ethos, a philosophical life in which the critique of what we are". This attitude uses reason as a tool, to start a historical criticism of "the limits that are imposed on us" to be exercised in "an experiment with the possibility of going beyond" those limits, thelimit-experience that is both an individual act, and one that breaks apart the concept of the individual all together.[3]

[edit]See also

[edit]References

No comments:

Post a Comment